State of the Culture: Legal victory, infantile men, and kidnapping Christian kids

In this week’s culture update, we start with good news–Trinity Western University’s legal victory at the British Columbia’s Supreme Court, and then move on to more disturbing updates–as well as a further diagnosis of the West’s collective insanity.

****

First, the good news: Trinity Western University has just won another legal battle, this time at the British Columbia Supreme Court. From LifeSiteNews:

Trinity Western University has won round three of its tumultuous battle with Canada’s legal profession, as the B.C. Supreme Court ruled today the province’s lawyers had violated Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms when they rejected in advance graduates of the Langley, B.C. Christian university’s proposed law school.

“The evidence in this case and the relevant precedents conclusively establish that the decision does infringe the petitioners’ Charter right to freedom of religion,” stated Chief Justice Christopher Hinkson.

The Law Society had essentially labeled Christian sexual morality a hate crime, refusing to recognize legal students from TWU’s proposed law school because of a covenant that TWU has all students and teachers sign, committing them to the Christian sexual ethic. It doesn’t matter, apparently, that this is a Christian university with Christian standards that no one has to attend if they don’t want to. It only matters, in the eyes of many, that the new secular orthodoxy on sex is being violated, and thus the persecution TWU has been undergoing for years now.

For today, though, we take pleasure in and give thanks for a significant legal victory.

****

If you thought the “transgender” madness was going to get less insane, you were wrong. The Independent recently reported that “Transgender father Stefonknee Wolschtt leaves family in Toronto to start new life as six-year-old girl.” That’s right. A fully grown husband and father of seven children had been married for 23 years when he suddenly—and the media is straight-facedly calling him a she already—“realized” that he was actually a six-year-old girl. He is now living with an “adoptive family,” because he does not “want to be an adult right now.” He lives with an older couple who “are totally comfortable with me being a little girl.” The media is covering a man who dresses and lives like a six-year-old girl and abandoned his own family because of his “feelings” like he’s a hero. Because as we now know, living true to what you want and what you feel is infinitely more important than the responsibilities you have to those around you, including children you helped bring into the world. And yes, that was sarcasm.

But the good news is that if you’re a man who wants to abandon his responsibilities, decide not to be an adult, and live as a little girl, you were born in the right century.

****

I mentioned last week that the day could very well be coming when governments treat Christianity as a disorder—while simultaneously treating those like the previously mentioned fellow as perfectly sane. A case that surfaced this week in Norway is particularly disturbing. From World Net Daily:

Norway’s child welfare services, the Barnevernet, seized Marius and Ruth Bodnariu’s two daughters, two sons and subsequently their baby, Ezekiel, the report said.

Social services agents and police took the family’s two oldest children out of their school without their parents’ knowledge and hid them in an undisclosed location.

Then the agents and officers went to the family’s home, “where, apparently without any documentation, they seized their two sons and arrested Ruth – who they took to the police station along with baby Ezekiel. Marius was arrested while he was at work and also taken into custody.”

The parents were interrogated but later allowed to return home with their baby but no other children. Then the next day the baby also was seized, the report said…

Finally, a lawyer obtained by the parents accessed some of the case documents and discovered the parents were accused of being “radical Christians who were indoctrinating their children.”

According to Bodnariu’s December 3 communique, the principal of the school attended by Eliana and Naomi reported to Barnevernet that the girls had talked about being disciplined, that the family was “very Christian.” She also reported that, in Daniel’s words, “the grandmother has a strong faith that God punishes sin, which, in her opinion, creates a disability in children” and that the parents needed “help” in raising their children.

After all, the one sin left in today’s West is calling something a sin.

This weekend, the New York Times made headlines. A story, titled “Where Radical Is Sensible,” profiled a Manhattan activist center, and spurred a broader conversation about gender neutral pronouns. “Mx. Hardwick, 27, who prefers not to be assigned a gender — and also insists on the gender neutral Mx. in place of Ms. or Mr.,” the piece read, consistently referring to “Mx. Hardwick” throughout.

Though the move was touted as something of a victory, perhaps signaling broader acceptance of gender neutral language, the profile seemed to imply the opposite, linking Hardwick’s gender neutrality with the store’s “radicalism.” More jarring was the clarification. It was understandable that the Times found it necessary to define the honorific “Mx.” for readers unfamiliar with the term. But it was bizarre that the paper attributed the editorial decision to Hardwick’s “preference,” or, for that matter, felt the need to explain it at all. The Times went out of its way to make clear that it would have assigned Hardwick a gender but for the subject’s insistence otherwise.

And so on. Outrage is only reserved for the most petulant of distinctions. The feelings of these infantile adults must be protected at all costs. And if you want to know why the media elites are so obsessed with these fictions?

Shut up,” they explained.

Another interesting wording: The gender-bender warriors are now referring to the sex you were “assigned at birth,” as if the attending physicians merely took a stab at it. Did you buy more blue or more pink? Let’s roll with “girl,” then. In reality, for those of you who have since departed it, doctors correctly identify the presence of male or female genitalia, and record their observations.

And for those offended by my “gender stereotyping” mentions of pink or blue, I would only point out that when man-children like the dead-beat dad turned-six-year-old-girl decide to be feminine, suddenly “stereotypically” feminine clothing are what they utilize to prove that they are, in spite of having a penis, women. So save the outrage—you never know when you’ll need it.